#1: Why did God Sacrifice Saul? If God did not want a king to rule over Israel why did he need a transitory figure? I don’t understand why God must have a “bad” king before he can have a king “after his own heart.” Couldn’t God just spare Saul’s misery? Why would God ever purposefully sacrifice and torment one of his own creations? Maybe we could compare this to Jesus as God willingly sacrificed his creation, his son. The only difference I see between Saul and Jesus is that God is on Jesus’ side the whole time and definitely not on Saul’s. But then again, Jesus says, “Why have you forsaken me?” while he is on the cross, so maybe Jesus and Saul are more alike than we think. They were both sacrificed and forsaken by God for the good of the people (i.e. the Israelites). Consequently, it seems God needs a sacrifice to help people and thus chose Saul and Jesus as the transitory figures. So Saul was a sacrifice and a transitory figure. Can a transitory figure equal a sacrifice? Is a sacrifice some kind of transition? Jesus served as a sacrifice to bring people from sin to redemption while Saul served as a sacrifice to bring people from a judgment society into a monarchial society. I ask, “In what ways can a sacrifice be considered a transition.” Maybe it is the killing of the old to access something new or at a different level. Saul was a freethinker like the genesis figures and God punished him for acting on his own. Saul also disobeyed God like many before him. The sacrifice of Saul can be viewed as God killing disobedience to access complete obedience. The monarchial society represents obedience because such a society requires suffrage, service, and obedience to the king. This society with David (who is “after God’s own heart) as the upcoming king might serve as a metaphor for God’s monarchy. God killed the disobedience of a judgment society (a society where disobedience was weighed) by sacrificing Saul who was the progeny of such a society; thus, welcoming a society with strict rules that must be followed, a monarchy with David as head who demands obedience like God. #2: Huck Finn I was initially surprised to discuss Huck Finn in Bible class; but, I soon realized Huck’s issues with morality were completely applicable. Our society has very structured limits of right and wrong like Huck’s culture. However, Huck has the audacity to realize he does not quite fit in with his society’s principles and leaves the only home he has ever known. He does not know where he is headed or for what he is searching. Huck just wants to live genuinely. He bravely navigates a world where he decides what is true. The moment Huck denies his old society’s beliefs and says, “Alright then, I’ll go to hell!” (Referring to his decision not to send Jim back to be Mrs. Watson’s slave), is the exact moment he sees the big picture and makes it to Heaven. This is the kind of leader I aspire to be. Not one of convention, but one of truth. Perhaps, we, like Huck, can only grasp the big picture when we accept a drawing that does not fit inside the lines. It seems throughout Job, Genesis, and Exodus God is constantly redefining what we see as right and wrong. I am not comfortable but ok to live in a confusing mess if it means I am on my way to discovering true morality. #3: Submission to the Charter for Compassion
Youth is hopeful because they have not yet been beaten down by the problems of the world. But my generation of youth has seen hunger, catastrophe, terror, nuclear threats, global warming, and epidemics like the spread of aids. Yet, we are not any less of an answer because of it. This rising youth is key in promoting compassion because we are not like past generations in that we are blindly hopeful and optimistic. We possess the drive of youth but we are practical because we are not as innocent and more experienced then in the past. We set specific goals within our reach and actually accomplish them. We have seen and know a broken world. We want to change our future and have the spirit and determination to do so, one step at a time. #4: Witnessing September 11 I watched thousands of lit candles move across the television screen’s black sky. Each candle lit up a face: a face of grief, a face of fear, a face of strength. No one was fighting; no one was protesting. For the first time in my life, I saw America: I did not see superficiality; I did not see football; I did not see political correctness; I did not see obesity; I did not see greed. We were united. The September 11th attacks shocked and hurt us. However, if the motto “it is not how you fall, but how you pick yourself up” stands true, then America’s ascent from ground zero is worthy of praise. Our ability to come together in this time of crisis, showcasing the underlying might of America, gives me hope for the future. Yet, it also saddens me. Why does it take times of catastrophe to center us?
Disaster and loss cause us to re-evaluate what is important to us. And, seeing the end makes us appreciate and focus on the present. The people on the television did not care whether they were standing next to a Christian, a Jew, or an atheist; a black person, an Asian person, or a white person; a strait person or a gay person. No one protested prayers. They exhibited the rights of our constitution: freedom and tolerance.
In fifth grade, these events showed me more than the strength of our country coming together at a crucial time. They led me to see what harm is occurring today in our country at times when we are split apart by diversity. Currently, I believe we live in an offensive-phobic society. Will we succumb to a policy similar to France’s where wearing a turban or cross to school can land you in detention because an open display of beliefs can offend others? The people holding candles did not hide their views, but rather highlighted them. In the wake of terror, everyone accepted others as they were and moved on to more important issues.
This September, when the candles moved across the television screen’s black sky in remembrance of the lives lost seven years ago, I realized I want to be a force in the world like the people at these vigils; except, I want to move past diversity to accomplish common goals in not only times of conflict but also in times of peace. #5 Even though god cannot be defined in terms of “good and evil,” I do not believe that we should try to eradicate the concept from our own minds. God planted the tree of “the knowledge of good and evil.” Why would he even tempt us with something that he did not want for us? I think God initially destined for us to eat from the tree so that we may come to God through our own knowledge and experience instead of just being a puppet because God wants a relationship with someone who wants God on their own. Experiencing life armed with the concept of good and evil is hard. You suffer often due to “evil.” Just as Adam and Eve suffered once they gained knowledge so do we. Each spell of suffering we undergo leads us farther and farther from our innocence.
|
|
Hebrew Bible as Literature > Midrash >
Margaret Barton |